[mb-style] Should we change Classical Rules?

[Dave Smey]

> On Tue, Oct 03, 2006 at 12:11:14PM -0400, Aaron Cooper wrote:
>>
>> Don't be a jerk - no one likes fights on the mailing lists.
>
On Tue, October 3, 2006 6:49 pm, David Gibson said:
> Quite.
>
It's funny, I'm quite comfortable being labeled a jerk, but this
interpretation of how things played out is wrong:

> People look at classical music both composer-first and performer first
> depending on the circumstances.  Arguing about which is the more
> correct or erudite way of doing it is just petty and foolish.
> Especially since it's hardly clear that MB should cater to the
> "connoisseur" in preference to broad usability.
>
> I happen to think composer-first is more common overall, and so am
> dubious about the proposed style changes.

Let's just remember that my initial response to Christopher was simply
that classical music fans generally think composer-first.  Overstated,
perhaps, but not very far from what you opine here.

It was Christopher who claimed that performer-first was sophisticated and
composer-first was not.  (Indeed, he seems to think the latter is a
symptom of a cultural trend that is destroying classical music!) AND it
was Christopher who claimed to speak for the connoisseur.

> But that doesn't make
> insulting people who approach it the other way a worthwhile exercise.
> Even if they said something hot-headed first.

Chris's posts were not objectionable to me due to a few hot-headed
statements - they seemed deeply delusional.  Pointing out the fact that he
really doesn't seem to have much experience with Classical music was a
justified criticism, IMO.  (Perhaps he will learn from the experience and
not be so arrogant - though I admit that's pretty unlikely.)

I don't think I did the best job on my last post to him, but I don't
really regret it, either.  But next time, somebody else can talk to the
idiot.

-DS